Apartment Construction Tops 330,000 for 5th Consecutive Year

Housing Construction Tops 300,000 Again

The RentCafe reports Robust Apartment Construction for 6th Year

“The pandemic shifts and resurgence of the residential rental market brings new residential supply into focus,” says Doug Ressler, manager of business intelligence at Yardi Matrix. “Lack of entry-level housing supply and rising home prices will show the multi-family rental market demand increasing as new renters enter the market and Millennials extend their rental commitments.”

Construction Highlights

  • Apartment construction topped 300K for the 6th year in a row
  • Developers are set to bring 334,000 new apartments on the market this year.
  • 8 metro areas out of top 20 are expected to hit a 5-year high in apartment construction. Among these are 2 newcomers to the top builders’ club – the metro areas of Kansas City, MO (4,967 units), and Raleigh, NC (4,836 units).
  • In 2020, 13 metros out of the top 20 experienced decreases in apartment construction. This year, only 6 out of 20 metros are seeing drops.
  • The Dallas-Fort Worth metro area is the torchbearer of apartment construction for the 4th year in a row. Renters can rejoice knowing there are 21,173 new units in the pipeline, to be available on the market by year end.
  • The New York metro returns to pre-pandemic levels, with 19,375 projected units. The area is expected to see a 11% increase in apartment construction compared to last year.
  • Phoenix claims the 3rd spot nationally. A much-needed supply of 15,846 units is on the way.
  • Charlotte, NC is witnessing a boom, with a 100% increase in apartment construction over 2020. The projections show 10,723 apartments to be delivered this year. 
  • Orlando, FL has 78% growth, with projections at 8,211 units.

The NAR Claims There’s a Chronic 5.5 Million Shortage of Houses

A week ago I reported The NAR Claims There’s a Chronic 5.5 Million Shortage of Houses

I did not buy the NAR’s line then and I certainly don’t today.

Starts and Households Since 2000

  • 25,107 Total Starts
  • 18,837 Single Family Starts
  • 23,341 New Households

There were 25,107 starts and 23,341 new households. Starts were sufficient to cover households.

However, we do not know how many people wanted houses and did not get them. Nor do we know the numbers of houses that were torn down.

Starts and Households Since 2010

  • 11,866 Total Starts
  • 6,900 Single Family Starts
  • 14,760 New Households

Interestingly, since 2010 the US added 14,760 households but only 11,866 new houses.

Given the definition of household, the above numbers may seem impossible.

The apparent conundrum has an easy explanation: There was a pool of existing houses sufficient to accommodate millions of new households.

Underbuild or Overbuild?

Did we underbuild since 2010 or overbuild from 2001 to 2008?

Both? Neither?

Always a Shortage at the Top

Amusingly, the NAR argued in 2007 that there was a shortage of houses. Clearly there wasn’t.

At every market peak, there always appears to be a shortage. 

That does not imply this is the peak. Nor does it suggest anything about a shortage. 

Why Are Buyers Aggressive?

  • Cheap money from the Fed
  • Free stimulus money from Congress
  • A booming stock market bubble makes everyone feel wealthy

Let’s not confuse a genuine shortage with an artificial shortage due to monetary stimulus by the Fed and free money stimulus from Congress coupled with a booming stock market bubble.

If the Fed was not manipulating rates lower and openly encouraging speculation in assets, I bet the apparent shortage would vanish.

Affordable Housing Fiasco

In reality, there is no shortage, so some state it this way: “There’s a shortage of affordable homes.”

For that problem, please look at the cheap interest rates from the Fed and scores of programs at every level (Federal, State, Local), that encourage ownership. 

Every “affordable housing” program for decades has increased demand, driving prices up.

Homes were actually affordable following the housing crash in 2009. Governments and the Fed did everything they could to drive prices back up. 

When homes were affordable, neither the Fed, nor the banks, nor local governments were happy. 

Hooray, they are all happy now that they can again launch more “affordable housing” programs!

Addendum

Surpluses and shortages can exist locally even if there is enough housing overall.

For example, people constantly move out of Illinois to Texas, Florida, and even Indiana.

But the NAR’s estimate and methodology of lumping it all together concluding a shortage of 5.5 M homes is nonsense. It neglects overbuilding, and most important attitude changes.

Millennials and Zoomers are more prone to be flexible in jobs,  moving, and housing than their Boomer parents. The Fed and Congress temporarily suppressed that trend but for how long?

Demographically speaking, a big wave of boomer deaths is on the horizon. That will add to housing supply everywhere, but more so in Florida cities than Austin.

There is not a one size fits all as the NAR tried to do with its self-serving calculation.

Please Subscribe!

Like these reports? I hope so, and if you do, please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

If you have subscribed and do not get email alerts, please check your spam folder.

Mish

Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

This post originated on MishTalk.Com

Thanks for Tuning In!

Mish

Comments to this post are now closed.

9 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
George_Phillies
George_Phillies
4 years ago
“…since 2010 the US added 14,760 households…”  Did you omit some trailing zeros?  In 20 years, the US population has increased by millions and million, not thousands and thousands.
Bungalow Bill
Bungalow Bill
4 years ago
The idea the stock market is an acurate measurement of the economy truly baffles. 
Casual_Observer2020
Casual_Observer2020
4 years ago
Apartment boom is a sign more people cannot afford to buy a house and will be renting forever. Eventually buying a home will be a goal for retirement rather than something you do in your 20s or 30s. Someone needs to propose principal being tax deductible and this will help everyone in America and cause yet another real estate boom. 
StukiMoi
StukiMoi
4 years ago
“Did we underbuild since 2010 or overbuild from 2001 to 2008?”
Anytime a manufactured good costs more, over a long period, than it’s cost of building, it is being under-built. And for any good which decays over time yet still serves a function, the mere fact that the older, lower quality ones are not darned near free, is a pretty surefire indication that the under-building is severe.
With current technology, there is exactly no reason whatsoever for most people not to have several houses/apartments. Ditto places of work. And only paying much if they want “nice” ones; with the rundown stuff being about as costly as a mid 80s car, or 10 year old IPhone. The fact that you have even working people effectively homeless, is as clearcut proof of extreme and pervasive underbuilding as anything you will ever find in empirical social science.
Bam_Man
Bam_Man
4 years ago
“You will own Nothing and be happy about it.”
Mish
Mish
4 years ago
Surpluses and shortages can exist locally even if there is enough housing overall.
For example, people constantly move out of Illinois to Texas, Florida, and even Indiana.
But the NAR’s estimate and methodology of lumping it all together concluding a shortage of 5.5 M homes is nonsense. It neglects overbuilding, and most important attitude changes.
Millennials and Zoomers are more prone to be flexible than their Boomer parents. The Fed and Congress temporarily suppressed that trend but for how long?
Demographically speaking, a big wave of boomer deaths is on the horizon. That will add to housing supply in places like Florida but less so in places like Austin. 
There is not a one size fits all as the NAR tried to do with its self-serving calculation.
Eddie_T
Eddie_T
4 years ago
“Affordable Housing” is a euphemism for housing that people who can’t make a house payment on the median house, or even on the lowest cost house available in the market (that’s fit for habitation)…..can pay to buy or rent.
Affordable housing as we know it now always has to be subsidized by somebody. Either by government, or by builders willing to give something to get something bigger ……like approval for permits for lots of new houses or apartments that wouldn’t ordinarily be forthcoming from the local authorities.
RunnerDan
RunnerDan
4 years ago
If we were a Christian nation, we would bring in more poor immigrants and subsidize their housing in apartments. This would help correct the oversupply of apartment housing which the free market never seems to get right. 
dtj
dtj
4 years ago
Not buying those statistics. I live in a small metro in the Northeast (Springfield, Mass). Despite the moribund economy, the population has increased 8% since 2010, mostly due to immigration. There are virtually no new houses being built in this area, only refurbishment of older houses. Rents and housing prices have gone way up over the last several years. A studio in an apartment complex I rented in 2010 when I first moved here went for $600 then and is now over $1000 today. You can’t get a livable house here for under $200K.

Decorate Your Walls with Mish Fine Art Images

Click each image to view details or purchase in the store.

Stay Informed

Subscribe to MishTalk

You will receive all messages from this feed and they will be delivered by email.